866 research outputs found

    On Almost Well-Covered Graphs of Girth at Least 6

    Full text link
    We consider a relaxation of the concept of well-covered graphs, which are graphs with all maximal independent sets of the same size. The extent to which a graph fails to be well-covered can be measured by its independence gap, defined as the difference between the maximum and minimum sizes of a maximal independent set in GG. While the well-covered graphs are exactly the graphs of independence gap zero, we investigate in this paper graphs of independence gap one, which we also call almost well-covered graphs. Previous works due to Finbow et al. (1994) and Barbosa et al. (2013) have implications for the structure of almost well-covered graphs of girth at least kk for k∈{7,8}k\in \{7,8\}. We focus on almost well-covered graphs of girth at least 66. We show that every graph in this class has at most two vertices each of which is adjacent to exactly 22 leaves. We give efficiently testable characterizations of almost well-covered graphs of girth at least 66 having exactly one or exactly two such vertices. Building on these results, we develop a polynomial-time recognition algorithm of almost well-covered {C3,C4,C5,C7}\{C_3,C_4,C_5,C_7\}-free graphs

    Network Design with Coverage Costs

    Get PDF
    We study network design with a cost structure motivated by redundancy in data traffic. We are given a graph, g groups of terminals, and a universe of data packets. Each group of terminals desires a subset of the packets from its respective source. The cost of routing traffic on any edge in the network is proportional to the total size of the distinct packets that the edge carries. Our goal is to find a minimum cost routing. We focus on two settings. In the first, the collection of packet sets desired by source-sink pairs is laminar. For this setting, we present a primal-dual based 2-approximation, improving upon a logarithmic approximation due to Barman and Chawla (2012). In the second setting, packet sets can have non-trivial intersection. We focus on the case where each packet is desired by either a single terminal group or by all of the groups, and the graph is unweighted. For this setting we present an O(log g)-approximation. Our approximation for the second setting is based on a novel spanner-type construction in unweighted graphs that, given a collection of g vertex subsets, finds a subgraph of cost only a constant factor more than the minimum spanning tree of the graph, such that every subset in the collection has a Steiner tree in the subgraph of cost at most O(log g) that of its minimum Steiner tree in the original graph. We call such a subgraph a group spanner.Comment: Updated version with additional result

    Distributed coloring in sparse graphs with fewer colors

    Full text link
    This paper is concerned with efficiently coloring sparse graphs in the distributed setting with as few colors as possible. According to the celebrated Four Color Theorem, planar graphs can be colored with at most 4 colors, and the proof gives a (sequential) quadratic algorithm finding such a coloring. A natural problem is to improve this complexity in the distributed setting. Using the fact that planar graphs contain linearly many vertices of degree at most 6, Goldberg, Plotkin, and Shannon obtained a deterministic distributed algorithm coloring nn-vertex planar graphs with 7 colors in O(log⁥n)O(\log n) rounds. Here, we show how to color planar graphs with 6 colors in \mbox{polylog}(n) rounds. Our algorithm indeed works more generally in the list-coloring setting and for sparse graphs (for such graphs we improve by at least one the number of colors resulting from an efficient algorithm of Barenboim and Elkin, at the expense of a slightly worst complexity). Our bounds on the number of colors turn out to be quite sharp in general. Among other results, we show that no distributed algorithm can color every nn-vertex planar graph with 4 colors in o(n)o(n) rounds.Comment: 16 pages, 4 figures - An extended abstract of this work was presented at PODC'18 (ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing
    • 

    corecore